Skip to content
Join our Newsletter

CRD refused to hear sewage evidence

Re: “Keep close eye on sewage plans,” editorial, Aug. 20. The editorial erred in stating that Capital Regional District decision-makers weighed the evidence, pro and con.

Re: “Keep close eye on sewage plans,” editorial, Aug. 20.

The editorial erred in stating that Capital Regional District decision-makers weighed the evidence, pro and con. In fact, the Core Area Liquid Waste Management Committee voted not to hear the science and evidence against the sewage plan, of which there is volumes.

Essentially, the same directors on the committee who voted against Vic Derman’s motion voted not to hear that evidence. Instead, some of these same directors justify the plan with such unscientific comments as: “I’ll be able to poop as often as I want to for a dollar a day” (Dean Fortin) and “My 14-year-old son said we should build it” (Marianne Alto).

The editorial also erred in stating that “federal regulations prohibit discharging sewage into the ocean.” In fact, they regulate discharges into the ocean, and their stated objective is “to reduce threats to fish, fish habitat and human health from fish consumption.”

Given that there is no historical evidence that Victoria’s current treatment system has been causing any one of these threats, one has to question why we are being saddled with a billion-dollar project to replace a system that already meets the federal objectives. Is it any wonder that polls consistently show that 65 to 85 per cent of Victorians oppose the plan?

Brian Burchill, chairman

Association for Responsible and Environmentally Sustainable Sewage Treatment